Moho Forum

I dunno what it is, some folks think referencing for animations is a bad thing in that, you're not drawing out of your head enough.

Apparently its somehow better to draw an alfa romero car out of memory rather than look at an alfa romero car and draw it

I'm just curious if you've ever run into this and what do you think of it?

Since everything someone does creatively can always be based off of something earlier, is anything ever really original?

Before starting my journey to animation, I preferred cartoon drawing and creating a site magazine for where I was working at the time. I fell into animation dabbling by accident but still use cartoon drawing and improvement books to give my little animation a helping hand. Inspiration I think needs events outside to give it life such as drawing a neighbour frustration starting his worn out car.

Generally, reference is "transformed" in the process. That's when something becomes original. Artists use reference all the time. In the old days, it was called a morgue. You can't possibly know how to draw every object that's ever existed.

Using references is fine. However, slavishly copying another work is something else entirely.

This is what I usually do. I am not sure if I am breaking any laws by this but there is really no likeness other than the body pose.

That's great - only that you made the neck too long to justify the creases ...

slowtiger wrote:That's great - only that you made the neck too long to justify the creases ...

Yep, That was an old photo and her neck and head or not like this any more. Neeters_guy actually came up with a good head and hair for her. I have been meaning to ask him if I could use his design.

Every artist draws from life, and from existing art. Anyone who says it is more desirable to work without reference is a fool or, even worse, an arrogant fool. Art and civilisation develop precisely because people feed off others, and if we didn't then we would all still be running around eating fruit in an isolated valley in Ethiopia, or whatever it was that our early ancestors did to get by (maybe not such a bad thing for the planet, but that's a different matter...).

As far as animation is concerned, it's the result that counts. (Almost) anything that gets you to the result you want is good. If you want a realistic walk, the natural way is to study a person walking, and even trace them frame by frame. Why torment yourself by discarding the best materials out of some perceived taboo about what it means to be a "good" animator (ie. one who can conjure up any movement from his or her head alone)? I would agree that in normal circumstances, merely drawing over someone else's work without their knowledge is not to be encouraged, but look how Disney recycled their on animation over the years:


I rest my case.

hey Barry - totally agree with you!

and IMO even the "out of the head" stuff started somewhere in the real world - the chain (mesh!?) that links the original sources with the final product may be lost to both artist and viewer, but it'll be there somewhere. originality and innovation come from imaginative combinations of pieces from multiple sources...

back to Kellz’ point - if you want an Alfa then you copy an Alfa, but if you want a cartoon sports car the basic shape might be based on an Alfa, but put on huge rear wheels and a massive turbo sticking out the hood and have some dog in a flying helmet drive it and you have ...

kellz5460 wrote:I dunno what it is, some folks think referencing for animations is a bad thing in that, you're not drawing out of your head enough.

Apparently its somehow better to draw an alfa romero car out of memory rather than look at an alfa romero car and draw it

I'm just curious if you've ever run into this and what do you think of it?

Since everything someone does creatively can always be based off of something earlier, is anything ever really original?

Hello kellz5460,

Don't care about people who're crying about using references. Just ignore them and make art / animations the way you like the best (as long as you do it legally and don't break any copyright rules). Using references is also a very good practise.

If you look at professionals in the industry, they're pretty much always using references.

This is a topic that I, as an artist, have given a lot of thought to... and yes, the following is total opinion...

Yes, as a student of art, you are literally taught to "Copy the masters", and when doing that you sign your work as "after rembrant" etc.
Beyond the learning stage, you draw from life.. and you draw from your imagination. Its tempting to find source images on the internet or in publications of things that you dont have in life.. like a sports car,.. but if you rely on an image you find, you run the risk of reproducing someone else's creative work.

The creative work of an artist, including photographers, goes beyond the look of the subject in the image. It includes things such as , composition, pose, camera angle.

Its better not to use a single reference image to create a drawing, but to use what you have before you in life, or in your minds eye. If you need to draw a subject that you dont have or can't imagine, its better to view many reference images, so that you learn to understand their essence and then draw from your minds eye, with your own pose, composition and twist on the subject.

If you need to trace, and there are lots of good reasons to trace, then make your own photographs and and videos and trace from them.
If you need a certain pose, photograph yourself in that pose and draw/trace from that.

again.. pure opinion...
Stephen